|
Managing Employee Parking in a Changing Market
Click HERE for graphic. Acknowledgements Metro developed this handbook for use by employers who provide parking for their employees. Production of this handbook was made possible by a grant from the Federal Transit Administration. Eileen Kadesh of Metro's Market Development section and Diana Ehrlich, a graduate student at the University of Washington, coordinated development of this guide. Metro thanks Jane Gray of the Sverdrup Corp., Ross Henderson of the Puget Sound Power & Light Co. and Dick Gillissee of the City of Kent for reviewing the text. Cathy Cole, program manager for the Economic Development Council's Commuter Challenge Program, and Ann Martin and Bonnie Nygren of King County Transportation Planning also played key roles in reviewing this handbook. i Table of Contents Why should employers care about parking? . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Parking is expensive . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 How prevalent is employer-subsidized parking?. . . . . . . . . . . 3 Why do employers provide free parking? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 It's time for a new perspective. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 What would commuters do if employers did not subsidize parking? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 So, how do you make a change?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Addressing employers' concerns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Parking management strategies that work. . . . . . . . . . . . . .12 Where to go for help . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 Parking cost worksheet Assumptions for calculating parking costs Development and operation costs for parking Potential cost savings from parking management References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-6 ii Why Should employers care about parking? At first glance, parking management - management of the location, cost, availability and demand for parking -may not seem like a very important topic. Yet, there are two good reasons why employers should take a fresh look at their corn any's parking policies: Reason No. 1: Effective parking management can save you money. - Employers who own their own site will find effective parking management can help them recoup the cost of their initial investment in parking. - Employers who lease their sites and do not pay a separate charge for parking in their leases may gain more control over the number of parking spaces assigned to them by developers or building management. This change can lead to more competitive rents. - Effective parking management can help employers avoid the need to build new parking spaces or lease additional parking. - Where employers reduce parking supply or charge market rates for parking, they also may reduce drastically the cost of setting up a trip reduction program. A study of 58 employers in Pleasanton, Calif., showed that the most cost-effective measure in reducing commute trips was to reduce employer-subsidized parking. The same study found that reduction of parking supply was among the top four measures estimated to lead overall cost savings to the employer per trip reduced.1 Reason No. 2: Effective parking management is one of the best ways to influence employees to stop driving to work alone. Research has shown there is a strong relationship between the availability and cost of parking and the choice of a commute mode. More than 75 percent of the people who drive to work in U.S. cities use parking provided by their employers. And 90 percent of those workers don't pay to park. For many employers, free parking at work is a 1 stronger incentive to drive than if their employer offered instead to give them free use of an automobile and free gasoline for their trips.2 The purpose of handbook is to provide employers the information they need to take a new look at employee parking policies. It suggests strategies that can make reducing or eliminating employer- subsidized parking a "win-win" situation for both an employer and its employees. Parking is expensive Employers spend a tremendous amount of money on parking. Costs associated with parking include taxes, construction and maintenance, in addition to the opportunity costs of converting spaces to uses with higher financial return. A 1985 survey in southern California found the cost to firms for employee parking ranged from $26,000 to $377,000 a year, with a median of about $40,000 a year.3 About 75 percent of suburban economic center parking is surface parking.4 A well-designed facility uses 300 to 325 square feet per car, including space for aisles, landscaping and other features. Surface parking costs $3 to $7 per square foot to build, including paving and drainage, lighting, landscaping and basic access and revenue control equipment.5 A parking stall of 320 square feet, therefore, would cost between $960 and $2,240 per space. Parking structures cost $5,000 to $12,000 per space, depending on their height and design, plus the cost of land.6 Based on the industry average of 300 square feet per car, each parking level can hold about 100 cars.7 Below-grade parking can cost $20,000 per space to develop.8 Cost equates to a yearly cost of nearly $2,700 amortized over 30 years at an 11 percent interest rate. A parking fee of $191 per month would only recover this capital cost. An additional charge would be necessary to cover operating costs. Very few employers in downtown Seattle and downtown Bellevue provide their own parking. Most lease their parking from the building management or from a parking management company. In downtown Seattle, the market 2 rate for parking in 1993 ranges from $60 to $150 a month. In downtown Bellevue, the market rate is about $75 a month. Despite some perceptions, there is no such thing as free parking, even in the suburbs. Someone always pays for parking - the building developer or owner, the employer or the employee.9 There is no such thing as free parking... The break-even fee is the per-space monthly charge to cover the cost of providing a parking space.10 A parking study of six suburban office sites in southern California with only surface parking showed an average break-even fee of $48 per space per month.11 The fee varied between $28 and $61 per month, depending on land cost and the efficiency of lot design. None of those sites had parking charges of any kind, either to tenants or to those who park. In such cases, developers and property owners must find revenue or cost reductions equivalent to $48 per month to pay for the cost of each parking space. Normally, the developer passes on this cost in the lease rates of the office space. Sometimes, however, property owners may charge a prospective tenant less or nothing for parking to ensure the office space leasing. Besides the direct costs employers pay for providing employee parking, oversupplying parking has opportunity costs. The demand for parking at suburban office sites in King County is about 3.05 spaces per 1,000 gross square feet.12 The developers' "rule-of- thumb" for supplying parking at such sites, however, is 4 spaces per 1,000.13 A recent study showed that if a typical office site in the suburbs could supply parking only to meet actual demand, site size could be 29 percent smaller.14 In the case cited, 55,000 square feet of land area was wasted because parking requirements were too high. At a typical land price of $11 per square foot, this extra parking costs $600,000 - funds the developer could use for landscaping, employee amenities or to increase return on investment. How Prevalent is employer-subsidized parking? Employer-subsidized parking is probably more wide-spread than most employers imagine. Downtown Seattle In 1992, nearly 50 percent of the employers in 3 downtown Seattle provided free or partially subsidized parking to their employees, compared with less than 40 percent in 1987.15 Employers in the sales and retail industry showed the largest increase in parking provision, from 21.4 percent in 1987 to 47 percent in 1992. Employers in the financial sector were the most likely to provide parking for their employees (58.3 percent provided such parking in 1992). A comparison of employer-provided parking by employer size showed a clear trend, with larger employers more likely to provide parking. More than two-thirds of the largest employers (100 or more employees) provided parking for their employees. Upper-management employees were also more likely than other employees to get subsidized parking. Downtown Bellevue In 1990, about 58 percent of downtown Bellevue employees responding to a survey reported that their employers provided free parking for all employees.16 Yet, 72 percent of those who drove reported paying nothing to park, implying that some employees are finding free parking off-site. Of those who did pay, the average amount was $42 per month. By comparison, in 1993 the market rate for parking in downtown Bellevue is about $75 per month. Why do employers provide free parking? - Employer-provided parking subsidies have been an integral part of the benefit package used to attract and keep employees. These subsidies can be direct (employers buy or reimburse employee parking) or indirect (employers pay higher lease rates). Indirect subsidies are most common in suburban areas. - Parking subsidies are nontaxable to $155 per month, so employers can provide a fringe benefit with a value that exceeds the same amount of taxable income. - Suburban employers do not normally have parking costs itemized separately in their building leases. The total rent includes the cost of parking for those employers. Thus, suburban employers usually do not 4 know how much it costs them to provide parking for their employees. They also have no monetary incentive to encourage their employees to use less parking. Those conditions have led to abundant free parking in the suburbs. A survey conducted by the Orange County Transit Authority in California asked 50 employers who did not charge their employees for parking their reasons for that policy (employers could respond more than once). Ninety-two percent said they provided free parking because it's considered an employee benefit. Many employers (42 percent) said they never considered the issue. Twenty percent said charging for parking would be too time consuming. Only one employer suggested a union or employee contract as the reason. These findings confirm the prevalent view of parking by employers - free parking is standard practice and largely a non-issue.17 It's time for a new perspective Now we want to make the case for reconsidering your business's employee parking policies. Below are some compelling reasons such a strategy will become critical in the next few years as companies struggle to remain competitive. Market conditions are changing Several factors will affect employer parking policies during the next decade: 1. The State Commute Trip Reduction Law About 600 companies in Kin County are considered affected employers under the state Commute Trip Reduction(CTR) Law. Undoubtedly, some employers will consider parking strategies only as a last resort. But others are looking ahead and realizing that commute alternative programs often have poor results when parking is plentiful and provided free to employees. If employers reduce parking supply or charge market rates for parking, the cost for setting up a CTR program can drop drastically. Some employers, such 5 as King County Medical Blue Shield (in downtown Seattle) and US West Communications (in downtown Bellevue), have achieved drive-alone rates significantly below their area average without providing transportation subsidies. The reason: They charge the market rate for parking and have limited parking available. 2. Tightening of parking supply Of the 52 employer demand management programs featured as models in the CTR guidelines, 50 percent began because of parking shortages at the work site.18 Many companies facing a shortage of parking, such as Kenworth Truck in south Seattle, have decided to meet the goals of the CTR Law by not building or leasing any new parking. Hospitals are one type of business facing a changing market for parking. As the number of outpatient surgeries increase in comparison with lengthy hospital stays, the need for more outpatient parking is becoming apparent. Hospitals in Seattle's First Hill area offered significant incentives to their employees mainly to ease the parking situation and provide more spaces for patients. 3. Increasing flexibility in leases Some building management companies will let tenants out of their leases under certain conditions. At least two management companies in downtown Bellevue have already negitiated new deals with tenants. The tenants can turn in parking spaces they no longer need and reduce their costs proportionately. Until now, tenants in those buildings did not know their parking cost because the lease did not itemize it separately. Market conditions in downtown Bellevue, however, make it more advantageous for lessors to rent parking spaces daily, instead of monthly. So, if an employer in this situation can persuade some portion of its employees to give up their cars and shift to alternate modes, the company can save money. 6 4. Economic conditions Because of the state of the economy, many companies are finding they need to cut costs to survive. Companies can save money by changing their parking policies in several ways: - Charge employees for parking or simply stop providing parking, requiring employees to find their own parking or choose other ways to commute. (Figure 1 in the appendix is an illustration of a company with 500 employees now paying $65 monthly per space for 425 employee parking spaces. Based on the parking management program in this example, the company can save $19,400 monthly, of $232,800 annually.) - Decide not to build or lease additional employee parking and focus instead on reducing the demand for the limited parking supply. - Convert excess parking supply to uses that are more profitable or beneficial to employees. Some ideas are to lease the parking to other companies, construct additional buildings on the space or convert the parking area to open space with a recreation or picnic area for employees. 5. Desire for more choice Employees are beginning to ask for an array of transportation choices as part of a benefit package. In response to this request and the need to reduce solo driving, some employers have begun to broaden their definition of accessibility from simply providing parking to offering a range of commuter services. Free parking by itself may not be enough to satisfy employees' expectations. What would commuters do if employers did not subsidize parking? Researchers who have analyzed case studies in the United States and Canada suggest that at least 20 percent of commuters who now drive alone would choose to carpool or use public transit if employers required them to pay market rates for parking they now receive free.19 7 Local studies provide comparable numbers. In a 1990 survey by Metro in downtown Seattle, more than 30 percent of the employees interviewed said they would drive alone less or ride the bus if they had to pay the full price of parking.20 Of about 24 percent of employees interviewed in downtown Bellevue said they would try ridesharing or use transit if parking costs increased significantly.21 Some employers might dismiss survey results by concluding that what people say they will do is far different from what they really do. Following that concern, below are the experiences of two local employers who stopped subsidizing employee parking. CH2M Hill Click HERE for graphic. CH2M Hill, a transportation engineering firm, faced a major challenge when it moved from a suburban area to downtown Bellevue in 1986. Of the 89 percent of employees who drove to work alone, 80 percent said no alternatives would make them switch. Despite that response, a parking charge of $40 per month (scheduled to increase each year until it reaches market rate), a new comprehensive parking management program and commute subsidy program produced dramatic results. In one year, CH2M Hill's single-occupant vehicle (SOV) rate dropped from 89 percent to about 62 percent - a 27 percent reduction in SOV commuting. Today, the company still maintains a 50-60 percent SOV rate, in an area where the average SOV rate is 82 percent. Bellevue City Hall Bellevue City Hall traditionally had more employees than parking stalls. In 1989, it responded to the parking shortage by charging a parking fee of $30 per month. The SOV rate for the site dropped from 75 percent in 1988 to 55 percent in 1989 - a 20 percent reduction. Key to that success was the fact that the parking charge was only one part of the city's rideshare parking management program. Besides the parking charge, the program featured a transportation allowance to all alternative-mode users, a bus-pass subsidy, a fleet-ride program and a guaranteed ride home program. Of note is Bellevue City Hall's 8 location outside the downtown area because transit service is not readily available. So, how do you make a change? After calculating your company's cost for providing employee parking, you may decide you are ready for a change. If so, here are a number of steps to be considered in developing parking management strategies: 1. Solicit top management support for parking management. 2. Form an internal committee to evaluate the parking situation and help propose strategies and solutions. 3. Evaluate site characteristics. Inventory existing parking supply and use. 4. Define objectives for parking management, and evaluate appropriate actions. 5. Check labor union agreements for parking stipulations (if applicable). Include a labor representative on your internal committee. 6. Review the costs or savings associated with each strategy. For carpool and vanpool parking subsidies and preferential spaces, assess future costs by first estimating demand. 7. Integrate parking management strategies into the total commute trip reduction program. 8. Market the parking management program with the marketing of other transportation alternatives. Above all, don't carry out parking management in isolation, but include it as part of a total commute trip reduction program. Couple parking restrictions with other transportation alternatives - all as part of a total transportation benefit package. Without sufficient alternatives, unhappy employees who continue to drive to work alone may be the most noticeable result! Addressing employer's concerns Employers cite a variety of arguments to justify continuing employee parking subsidies. Many of these concerns, however, are based on inadequate information or failure 9 to explore fully the wide range of solutions available. Here are the most common reasons for not tackling the issue of parking subsidies: - If employers charge for parking & employees will quit! Many local companies can testify that dropping subsidized parking by itself does not cause employees to quit. The key to a successful program is offering positive choices to employees. Employers should not begin a parking charge without offering attractive alternatives to driving alone. - Charging for parking is an administrative burden. Setting up a computerized payroll deduction system is one way to administer a parking charge efficiently. Time spent administering the program is limited to start-up and occasional changes. Some companies, however, believe employees are more aware of the amount they pay for parking if required to write a separate monthly check, instead of having the fee taken out of their paychecks automatically. For any system, revenue from the parking charge should exceed the cost of administering the program. - Union concerns. Most employers have not raised the issue of parking with their unions. This is still a largely unexplored area. However, employers will need to check with unions if they propose to take away free parking and should plan to offer other transportation benefits to balance the perceived loss. - Inadequate commuting options for employees. Companies have taken widely varying approaches to overcome the problem of inadequate transit service. Some have paid for special shuttles that run between nearby park-and-ride lots and their work site. Others, such as Safeco, have begun their own vanpool program. Both the First Hill hospitals and the Boeing Co. have worked with Metro to begin special shared-cost transit service plus vanpools tailored to the needs of a specific employee market. 10 When highly promoted by company management, ridesharing also can be effective for companies in low-density areas. Kenworth Truck, for example, has achieved a 66 percent SOV rate primarily by promoting the use of carpools and vanpools with a combination of reserved parking spaces for rideshare vehicles and general tightening of parking supply has been an effective incentive for employees to leave their own cars at home. - Inability to change an employer's parking allocation written into its lease agreement. An increasing number of building management companies are willing to allow some flexibility in lease agreements. That flexibility is still the exception, however, not the nile. Employers will have to check with their building management to discuss the potential for reducing their parking allocation and associated costs. Potential for employees to park free on streets or lots next to the work site. This problem is very real. Companies may be able to work with neighboring businesses and local planning departments, however. They can free off-site parking either through eliminating metered parking or residential - permit parking programs. Stricter enforcement measures, such as towing from lots of adjacent businesses, also could end "spillover" parking. - The need to deal with multiple sites. An employer with multiple sites may find there are equity issues in beginning a parking management program at one site and not providing the same program at the company's other sites. Readily available transit service may help justify dropping a parking subsidy at a downtown site. Labor unions may complain, however, about a parking policy that does not apply company wide. One solution may be to offer other incentives to accompany a parking charge. 11 Parking mnanagement strategies that work It is not expected or even recommended that employers make a sudden change from completely subsidizing employee parking to charging employees the market rate. Instead, a thoughtfully considered plan undertaken incrementally may be the most successful approach. Following are some ways to get employees on your side by introducing a parking charge gradually: - Introduce a parking charge for new employees only. Minor & James Medical in Seattle and Network Health on Mercer Island are among the companies successfully using this approach to ease into priced parking. The impact of such a strategy will depend on the company's rate of attrition and turnover. Gradually over the years, the parking charge will come to apply to most of the site's employees. - Allow employees to 'turn in' their parking spaces voluntarily in exchange for receiving the cash value of the parking space. Some employers that have experimented with approach include Digital Corp. in downtown Bellevue, Ernst Corp. headquarters in downtown Seattle, and Minor & James Medical on First Hill in Seattle. The theory behind this strategy is that asking commuters to choose between a free parking space and its cash value makes clear that parking has a cost - the cash not taken. The new "price" for taking the 'free" parking would increase the perceived cost of solo driving to work.23 Compared with other solutions to the employer-paid parking problem, the cash option requirement is least intrusive in the employer's decisions about employee compensation. The only added cost for an employer would be requests from current ridesharers for the cash value of parking subsidies they have not taken. 12 In choosing between a parking subsidy and its cash equivalent, employees would have to know the cash is taxable, while the parking subsidy is not. Research on commuters in Los Angeles, however, suggests that the taxable nature of cash does not diminish its attractiveness seriously.24 - Provide a transportation allowance. Some companies, such as CH2M Hill, offer a transportation allowance when they introduce a parking charge. A transportation allowance is usually a salary increase provided to all employees or to employees who do not drive alone. If a company levies a $40 parking charge, for example, the company may provide all employees a $40 transportation allowance. To be effective, the parking charge should be high enough so that the out-of-pocket cash required to make up the difference between the transportation allowance and the parking fee serves as a disincentive to park- Employees who do not drive alone can pocket the extra cash. Some companies provide a transit, carpool or vanpool subsidy besides the transportation allowance. - Begin a parking charge for single-occupant vehicles, but provide discounted or free parking to ridesharers. When carpoolers split the cost of a normal parking charge, they already cut their parking costs. Reducing the parking charge for rideshare vehicles even more provides a significant incentive for employees to carpool or vanpool. Some businesses allow carpoolers to park free, sending a powerful message to employees that company management values and supports ridesharing. While the employer does not gain revenue from parking spaces provided free to ridesharers, it reduces the need for more parking. The company then may be able to reach its commute trip reduction goals as more employees use carpools for commuting. 13 - Begin with a low parking fee and increase it annually until it reaches market rate. Although this plan can help generate some revenue for the employer, it will not-cause a significant shift to alternative commute modes for several years. As such, it is probably not as effective as beginning with a moderate charge and increasing it to market rate faster. This incremental increase will give employees a chance to adjust to the idea of paying for parking. - Provide employees with other transportation incentives while introducing a parking fee. Incentives such as a "flexpass" program, free parking days for ridesharers and guaranteed ride home are examples of programs that can help employees accept a parking charge. Hopefully, this handbook has given you some ideas for more effectively managing your company's employee parking. Changing your parking policy doesn't have to be painful. Parking management can help your company save money and, simultaneously, free up parking for customers and other visitors. You can use it to reward employees who rideshare and increase employee satisfaction by making company transportation programs more equitable. To begin reshaping your parking program, the following steps are recommended: 1. Calculate your parking costs. Use the sample parking cost worksheet in the appendix of this handbook. 2. Forecast your parking needs. With an aggressive CTR program, can you reduce your supply? 14 3. Check your building's lease for parking provisions. Perhaps you can negotiate a reduction in your parking allocation with the building management. 4. Form an employee parking committee to help design your parking benefits package. When you involve employees from the beginning, they will be more willing to accept the program you eventually adopt. If you need more help in developing your parking program, the following organizations have staff available to assist you: Metro's Corporate Transportation Representatives, 684-1546 The EDC's Commuter Challenge Program, 386-5040 TransManage (formerly the Bellevue Transportation Management Association), 543-0644 Overlake Transportation Management Association, 556-2416. 15 Appendix A-1 Parking Cost Worksheet Calculation of development and operation costs per stall The following breakdown of costs is representative of most projects involving development of parking facilities. Some commonly accepted "rules-of-thumb" for percentage of total cost attributable to a particular item are contained in the assumptions listed on the next page. Table 1 of the Appendix provides national averages for re-development, development, and operation costs in 1989 dollars. PRE-DEVELOPMENT COSTS Project Conception/Initiation _________________________ Project Evaluation _________________________ Program Design _________________________ Structure/ lot design _________________________ Landscaping design _________________________ Land Acquisition _________________________ DEVELOPMENT COSTS Construction Financing, Permanent Agreement _________________________ Marketing and Leasing _________________________ Final Design _________________________ Construction _________________________ A) Total Development Costs (Pre-Development + Development) ____________________ OPERATION COSTS (Annual) Operations _________________________ Maintenance (sweeping, striping, etc.) _________________________ Taxes Debt Service _________________________ Equity Payments _________________________ Depreciation (on equipment) _________________________ (B) Total Operating Costs ____________________ (C) Number of Stalls ____________________ Development Cost Per Stall (A/C) ___________________________ Operating Cost Per Stall (B/C) ___________________________ Total Cost Per Stall (A+B/C) ___________________________ A-2 Assumptions for calculating parking costs 1) Initial investigation of site to determine requirements equals 3% of total construction costs. 2) Structure/lot design equals 8-10% of total construction costs. This includes design of an underground water storm system and sanitary system, grading design, and storm drainage calculations. Landscaping design equals approximately 3-7/o of total construction costs. 3) Land Values: Suburban Location Eastside $25/sq. ft. Outer suburban $8-10/sq. ft. Central Business District Seattle $100-150/sq. ft. Bellevue $100/sq. ft. 4) Construction financing equals 1.5% of total construction costs. 5) Final design equals 10% of total construction costs. 6) Construction costs (per stall): Surface lots $1,000-$2,000; above grade structures $5,000- $8,000; below grade structures $12,000-$20,000. As a "rule- of-thumb", construction costs for below grade parking are approximately double those for above grade structured parking. 7) Approximately 10-20% of total gross revenue from a market rate parking charge goes toward operation costs. This percentage depends upon whether the lot is manned or not. 8) The fixed costs, land and construction, are typically amortized over 15 years with an 8% interest rate. For example, if total fixed costs for land and construction are $15,000/stall, the cost per stall per month will be $143. ($15,000 x 8% = $143/stall/month) FOR TENANTS WHO LEASE PARKING, THESE COSTS ARE IMBEDDED IN THE MONTHLY RENTAL RATES PAID FOR OFFICE SPACE. A-3 Click HERE for graphic. A-4 Figure 1* Potential cost savings from parking management To illustrate the use of parking pricing, the following is an example of a fictitious company which is considering a change in parking policy. The company's name is PCS Associates. of Employees 500 Cost/ parking space $65 per month Employer subsidy $65 for parking only Mode Parking Charge Mode Split Drive alone none 75% Carpool none 20% Transit n/a 5% Employer cost for 425 parking spaces in $27,625 monthly or $331,500 annually. $331,500 is a sizable sum that could be used to put together an effective company transportation program serving all employees. It would cost PCS no more money than it is paying for parking today. PCS is considering whether to charge for parking or to charge different rates, depending on the number of people sharing the ride. The greater the differential between parking rates for solo drivers and rates for those who rideshare, the larger the number of people who will change to a ridesharing mode for their trip to work. Mode Parking Charge Projected Mode Split Drive alone $65 50% Carpool (2-person) $30 42% Transit n/a 3% Vanpool 0 5% Cost savings to the employer under the proposed policy would be $19,400 monthly or $232,800 annually. Several parking pricing options and uses for the money collected exist. In terms of pricing, differential rates can also be charged for carpools (such as $35 for 2-person, $25 for 3-person, and $10 for 4-person carpools). To conclude this example, the proceeds from the parking fees (not including tax implications) could be used to enhance and offset part of the cost of PCS' employee transportation program. * Source: Commuter Transportation Services, Inc., Parking Management as a Transportation Demand Management Tool, Los Angeles, California, pp 7-8 A-5 References 1. JHK & Associates, Cost Effectiveness Study of TSM Measures in Suburban Settings, March 1992, p. 5-2. 2. Don Pickrell, Federal Tax Policy and Employer-Subsidized Parking, a white paper prepared for the Commuter Parking Symposium in Seattle, Washington, December 6-7, 1990. 3. Commuter Transportation Services, Inc., Parking Management as a Transportation Demand Management Tool, p. 2. 4. Richard Willson, Suburban Parking Economics and Policy: Case Studies of Office Worksites in Southern California, September 1992, p. 10. 5. Ibid., p. 10. 6. Ibid., p. 10. Richard Willson cites a figure of $8,000 to $12,000 for southern California sites, but Seattle area developers cite a slightly lower figure of $5,000 to $8,000. 7. Kristopher N. Anderson, "Evaluating Your Parking Situation", Development Magazine, March 1987, p. 35. 8. Richard Willson, Suburban Parking Economics and Policy.- Case Studies of Office Worksites in Southern California, September 1992, p. 10. 9. Bellevue Transportation Management Association HOV Incentives Task Force, HOV Incentives Packaging.- Offering Employers a Choice, August 1993, p. 3. 10. Richard Willson, Suburban Parking Economics and Policy: Case Studies of Office Work Sites in Southern California, September 1992, p. 23. 11. Richard Willson, Suburban Parking Requirements: A Tacit Urban Form and Transportation Policy, August 1993, p. 11. 12. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, Parking Utilization Study, June 1991, p. 1. 13. Richard Willson, Suburban Parking Economics and Policy: Case Studies of Office Worksites in Southern California, September 1992, p. 35. 14. Richard Willson, Suburban Parking Requirements: A Tacit Urban Form and Transportation Policy, August 1993, p. 11. 15. Ail of the information in this paragraph and the next paragraph is contained in: Puget Sound Regional Council, Downtown Seattle Employer Survey, 1992, February 1993, pp. 16- 17. 16. Gilmore Research Group, 1990 Bellevue CBD Transportation Mode Use Study, January 199 1, p. 29. 17. Richard Willson, Suburban Parking Economics and Policy: Case Studies of Office Worksites in Southern California, September 1992, p. 11. A-6 18. Washington State Energy Office, Commute Trip Reduction Task Force Guidelines, July 1992, p. 5-7. 19. Commuter Transportation Services, Inc., Parking Management as a Transportation Demand Management Tool, p. 3 20. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle, The Relationship between Parking and Mode Choice in Downtown Seattle. 1990 Downtown Seattle Employee and Employer Survey, revised draft, January 1993, p. 11. 21. Ibid., p. 13. 22. Telephone conversation with Dawn Nogales, Human Resources Specialist for Kenworth Trucks, September 1993. 23. Donald C. Shoup, Cashing Out Employer-Paid Parking.- Executive Summary, December 1992, p. 3. 24. Ibid., p. 6. A-7
